9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 151X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Span Overseas Ltd. [ 2015 (12) TMI 1743 - ITAT PUNE] A.O. ought not to have forwarded proposal to the Pr.CIT/CIT for revision of his own order have already remedy is available with the Assessing Officer to rectify his mistake u/s. 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Ld. Pr.CIT ought to have applied his own mind independently than should have initiated proceeding u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act. We are of the considered opinion; same is amount to miscarriage of justice. Appeal of assessee allowed. - ITA. No: 92/Asr/2020 - - - Dated:- 23-12-2021 - Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Member And Dr. M.L. Meena, Accountant Member) For the Appellant : Shri Sudhir Seghal ShriJatinder Sharma,AR For the Respondent : Smt. Abha Rani Singh, CIT/DR ORDER PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, J.M. 1. This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax order dated 23/02/2017 arising out of assessment order dated 25/03/2015. Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal: 1. That the Ld. Pr. CIT(Central), Ludhiana has erred in assuming the jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act 1961 and holding that the assessment as complet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the law in a meaningful manner which sub serves the ends of justice, for that is the life-purpose for the existence of the institution of courts. The learned Judges emphasized on adoption of a liberal approach while dealing with the applications for condonation of delay as ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appellate and refusal to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and the cause of justice being defeated. It was stressed that there should not be a pedantic approach but the doctrine that is to be kept in mind is that the matter has to be dealt with in a rational common-sense pragmatic manner and cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred over the technical considerations. It was also ruled that there is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately or on account of culpable negligence and that the courts are not supposed to legalize in justice on technical grounds as it is the duty of the court to remove in justice. In the said case the Division Bench observed that the State which represents the collective cause of the community does not deserve a litigant-non grata status, and the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red to be condoned in the interest of justice, where no gross negligence or deliberate inaction or lack of bona fides is imputable to the party seeking condonation of the delay. 3. In view of the above arguments advanced by the Ld. A.R. and going through the contents of affidavit and respectfully following the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court, we are of the considered opinion, that assessee has sufficient reason to condone the delay. Thus, we condone the delay and proceed with the appeal on merit. 4. In this case, a search and seizure operation u/s. 132 of the Act was carried out at the office premises of M/s. Gurfateh Films Sippy Grewal Productions Pvt. Ltd. During the course of search proceedings, certain documents relating to the Assessee company were found and seized. Thereafter a notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee. 5. The Assessee company is engaged in the business of production of films and distributions. In this case, return of income for the year under consideration was filed by declaring Nil income on 20.02.2015. The assessment in the case of the assessee was completed on 25.03.2015. The Ld. A.O. had thoroughly discussed the activities fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T/CIT for initiation of revisional proceedings u/s. 263. We are of the opinion, Ld. A.O. ought to not to have sent the aforesaid proposal to the Pr. CIT if there was any ambiguity in the order passed by the Ld. A.O. then he could have rectified he mistake u/s. 154 of the Income Tax Act. As we can see such exercise is not being done by the Ld. A.O. rather he chosen to send a proposal for revision of his order to the Ld. Pr. CIT. 9. In the case of Ambey Construction company vs. Pr.CIT in ITA No. 208/Asr/2017 order dated 07.05.2019 wherein Co-ordinate Bench has held that in revisional proceedings u/s. 263, Ld. Pr.CIT is required to apply his own mind and satisfaction before invoking the provision of Section 263 and not merely at the behest of the proposal forwarded by the A.O. is against the spirit of the Act as held by the Pune Tribunal in the case of Span Overseas Ltd. vs. CIT (ITA No. 1223/PN/2013. 10. The ITAT Kolkata Bench in the matter of Manish Chirania Vs. Pr.CIT in ITA No. 1161/Kol/2019 it is held as under: 9. We heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
